Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    
    Being "Single Again" for only a couple of years now, perhaps you've
    got more "experience" than I do with the new "rules of the game",
    but I have found honesty to still be the best policy and my suggestion
    to you is to say exactly what you mean - "I would like to sleep
    with you" (if that's what you want) or "I'd like to have s*x/make
    love with you" or whatever is appropriate for what you are feeling...
    It's less misleading (less likely to lead to feelings of rejection)
    and has worked quite well for me.  I agree with you, there are times
    when just sleeping together is a *very* *special* thing to do with
    someone you *really* care about (not necessarily love).  It would
    be very difficult for me to be asked to "go to bed together", get
    all my clothes off, and then be told that "all" she wants to do is
    "sleep together", and not take it as a personal rejection....
    
    					Joe

    
    Hi Brian,
    
       Believe me, you're not alone.  Many people share the same feelings
    you do.  I have to agree with .1 though.  In my past experiences,
    honesty has always been the best policy.  Yes, sometimes the truth
    hurts but I know I would much rather have someone respect me enough
    to tell me the truth than try to spare my feelings.  I hate being
    led on.  But what hurts more, hurting someone (with honesty), or being
    hurt?  Well, I'm discovering that hurting someone is worse.  Without
    going into a sob story, the best advice I can give you is this;
    Be honest with people. Dont be afraid of it because to be dishonest
    with another person is to be dishonest with yourself, and that is
    an easy trap to fall into.  When I say dishonest, I also mean not
    telling someone the "whole" truth.  Its amazing how so many people
    think that by keeping a particular part of the truth out of the
    conversation, they're not being dishonest. Makes them feel better
    about it I guess.  Give it time Brian.  Its no concillation but
    time is on your side.  Your 23 you say?  You're still a youngin'.
    I know how much I used to hate to hear that.  I'm only 21 but  I feel 
    I know more than a lot of 30 year olds (based on the ones that I
    know).  I'm just grateful for the experiences I've had but most
    importantly, I've learned a lesson from each and every one of them.
    I'm not rushing anything anymore.  Have faith, dont give up so soon.
    Just be honest, but keep your eyes open too.  You'll find it.
    
    For the cornball in us all... 8^)
    
    "...Love tells us many things that are not so.  It is with true
     love as with ghosts, everyone talks of it, but few have ever seen it.
     True love doesnt consist of holding hands, it consists of holding
     hearts ...But for you to ask advice on the rules of love, is no
     better than to ask advice on the rules of madness.  Love is the way 
     it is. Love is an endless mystery for it has nothing else to explain 
     it. Love is there, waiting."
    
                                                     ??
         
    
    -d
    
                                     

    
    	It sounds like you have a good justification worked up to cover
    your actions. But I see it as coming from some sort of power trip
    you're doing on your own and the other person's head. *I'd* never
    do that, unless I was hopelessly "set up" in a situation that I did
    not want to continue, period. In working from the power game level
    of thinking, you'll never derive happiness, no matter how righteous
    or noble you may think your actions are!
    
    	Joe Jas
    

    Let's face it, the phrase "let's go to bed" or "i slept with so
    and so" has come to mean "sex".  So, if I were with a guy who said
    he wanted to go to bed I'd think he meant he wanted to have sex
    with me.  If I said yes, only to find out he didn't want to have
    sex with me I'd feel like a damn fool.

    After all, if I want to *sleep* I have my own bedroom at home with
    my own bed, my own records, my own books, and my own cat!!  :-)
    
    Lorna
    

     
    		way to go Lorna!

    
    
    Thanks .6.
    
    I think I am being misunderstood.  Thanks, also, to .1 & .2 but
    what I'm talking about is "going to bed without sex".
    
    .4 & .5, am I to understand that the only reason you'd go to bed
    with someone is to have sex.  That'd either be real lonely or *VERY*
    tiring.  Don't you ever have the desire to just BE with someone?
    To hold someone in you arms and dream.
    
    As far as I can see I'm getting support from the guys but not from
    the women(except for a personal reply, thanks D**bi*).  
    
    
    	Maybe "We're" lost in the 80's
    
        Brian
    	

    
    
    What you need to do is be very clear. "I want to spend the night
    with you but I do NOT want to have sex."  That way there is no
    misunderstanding.  I agree, If a man said to me I want to sleep
    with you I would assume he meant SEX.  If I had never "slept" with
    him before I would think he wanted sex.  If I had than I would not
    expect sex each time we spent the night together.  
    
    Let me say though, If this was going to be the first time I did
    spend the night with a man and he just wanted to sleep, I would
    feel more comfortable in my own bed, first nights are not comfortable
    so why bother if a Teddy Bear would do.  I would feel that any warm
    body would do for this person and it was me because I just happen
    to be around.  No thank you. I like myself too much,  cuddling is
    great with someone you care about just as sex is, but to be just
    a bed mate!!!!
    
    sim
    
    

    
    re: -.1
    
    I think I may understand what Brian is trying to convey about a
    desire to "cuddle".  Correct me if I am wrong, Brian, but what I 
    am hearing is that you would like to spend an evening cuddled up 
    next to a woman that you do care about.  Yes, first nights are 
    awkward and that's why just being together and cuddling each other 
    can be so nice.
    
    re: .0
    
    I'm not sure I would term what you are talking about as "lost in
    the 80s", although it does seem somewhat nonexistent these days.  
    You wanted support from a woman's point of view, here it is:  
    
    If I was approached by a man who asked to "sleep" with me, or me
    to go to bed with him, I would take it as one in the same - a desire
    for sex.  One of the other replies hit the nail on the head when
    they suggested you tell the person you want them to spend the night
    with you BUT I would suggest adding that you have no expectations 
    for anything more.
    
    From what I've seen and heard, every day displays of affection don't 
    seem to enter the scope ofa relationship today like it once did.  I 
    crave affection and look forward to receiving that affection from my 
    husband daily.  The affection we display for each other is a very 
    large part in how we relate together.
    
    Beckie

    Well, this woman thinks it's just wonderful to sleep (only)
    with a man...and a nice way to ease gently and gracefully
    into a sexual relationship (I'm the type to take it real
    real slow....).  I have on more than one occasion spent the
    night with a man, and "only" slept...men have told me it's
    very nice not to be expected to perform, that sometimes they
    just want to snuggle.  
    
    It IS a good idea to make your intentions (or lack of) very
    clear....some men will use this "please just sleep with me"
    ploy as a means to get a woman into their bed, and then do
    their darndest to convince the woman to have sex.
    
    

    No Brian,
    
    	You are not lost in the eighties, just caught up in all the
    	"fads"...  Love does exist, but I feel that it's something you
    	don't go looking for it just happens!
    
    	I personally have just met someone really wonderful and feels
    	exactly the way you do.  I didn't think that there were any
    	guys left out there who feel that way.  Most guys (sorry!) will
    	say anything to get what they want. 
    
    	So don't feel lost in the eighties, you aren't --- they are!
    
    	Sharon

    
    RE: .0
    
    Go see Eddie Murphy "Raw" in Boston Garden on December 4th (I think
    that is the right date).  He will have some real good answers for
    you.  Seriously.  I am not joking.

    -Edward.
    

    P.S.    Actually, folks, we could easily start a whole new subject about
    "Raw"...   Its too bad that I don't have the time right now to do
    it myself.

Cuddling is nice, even without the sex.  Whatever happened to the romantic
courting; snuggling without going 'all the way'?

How about: "Let's go to sleep.", or "Snuggling is quite nice, I could do
this all night." Honest is best.

Most of the times I've 'just' slept, it hasn't been a prearranged bid deal, you
were just snuggling together without being forward, and you just kind of fell
asleep together.. nice... 

RE: .4,.8

Sorry, 

  bedroom + bed + records + books + cat + Teddy Bears 
< 2 people snuggling + talking + nuzzling

You'd think that there was nothing worthwhile to "sleeping" "Together" except
sex!!! 

RE: .8

I don't believe he's talking about "any warm body would do for this person and
it was me because I just happen to be around".

It's nice to have "someone special" to snuggle with, but everybody wants to be
***the*** special ***one***, and cut out the competition. 

I don't know about you, but a bedmate is *not* "just a bed mate".

Jim.

    Re: .15
    
    Exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn't phrase it quite right.
    (Then I got distracted by work :-)  )
    
    Cuddling and snuggling are great ways to say "You're special" and
    "I care".
    
    Amy

    		-< Most men, Most women: there are a lot of us!>-
    
    	I agree, I don't say that it is all men, of course I have never
    	run into this "situation" with a woman so I don't know.  But
        I do feel that men say alot of things they don't really mean.
        No, I have not actually surveyed but I don't live in a closet
        either.  
    
    	As for not knowing exactly what to say:  Sometimes the truth
        is the best answer.
        
    
    	-S-
    

    This all sounds like 'the 80's' version of 'Bundling', but without
    Mom & Dad tucking you in and without the 'Bundling board' between.
    
    Bob Mc

    Re .18, funny :-).
    
    There's a proper time and place for "cuddling" and "snuggling" -
    before and after sex.
    

    RE:.19
    
    Proper?   By whose standards?  That reminds me of a couple who used
    to set the clock when they would go to bed together.  Since when
    has being close meant that sex must be involved?
    
    Even cats understand how nice it is to be held and petted!
    
    RE.18 
    
    Psychologically, board building is a national pastime.  Somehow
    I wonder what would happen if DEC lowered the cubicle partitions
    a little.  There probably would be a outcry for the lack of privacy;
    but at least we would know our neighbor!

    Re .20, Frankly, I guess I just don't see what the big deal is about
    cuddling all night, with someone you presumably don't sleep with
    on a nightly basis, and not having sex.  If I liked somebody well
    enough to "cuddle" with them all night chances are I'd like them
    well enough to have sex with, too, and unless I was afraid the person
    had Aids or it was a question of birth control, I really can't
    see why the cuddling wouldn't eventually turn into sex.  If I didn't
    find the person attractive enough to have sex with I wouldn't care
    to spend the night "snuggling" with them either.
    
    Obviously, in a relationship that goes on for months and years of
    sleeping together night after night there are times when physical
    affection doesn't turn into sex.  But, I didn't take that to be
    what was being discussed here.  
    
    Lorna
    

    But why is the "proper" place before and after sex?  
    
    Haven't you just had a lousy day and someone coiled up on a couch
    with you and made you forget how lousy it was?
    
    And, pardon the supposition, I think that is exactly what the note
    is refering to.  There seems to be a unending conflict between the
    sexes that men have one thing on their mind all the time.  The display
    of tenderness and affection can be at many levels.  Part of it can
    be close contact without sexual intercourse. 
    

    Re .22, I was just joking about saying the proper place for cuddling
    if before and after sex (because if there's anything lousy in this
    world it's sex without cuddling).
    
    Actually, no I've never had a friend to just cuddle up with on the
    couch after a bad day.  I've had friends to discuss bad days with
    and friends/SO's/a spouse to have sex with after a bad day, but
    never any relationship that just included cuddling (except my cats).
     I guess I didn't know it was possible with other humans.
    
    

    There is something strange about this whole conversation and I am
    not sure if I can put my finger on it but I will try.
    
    The author of the base note is suggesting that the female population
    cannot accept the idea of sleeping with a person of the opposite
    sex without making love.  He might also be saying that the people
    of the '80's cannot accept this concept and perhaps we are a product
    of a society that dwells to much on sex.
    
    I suggest that his attitude is not the norm, not the instinctive
    reaction to closeness of two adult humans.  If he has that need
    (to sleep, cuddle) then he has the responsibility to explain that
    to his partner. 
    
    I find it difficult to swallow the idea that I am bad if I expect
    to make love when I cuddle, sleep or I am close to a man.
    
    The actions and reactions of closeness and lovemaking are very
    instinctive any other behavior would be learned.
    
    There is more to this note than meets the eye....I still haven't
    figured it out.

    Re .24, exactly!  What's so bad about wanting to have sex while
    you're cuddling???
    
    I was beginning to feel that I had just discovered (slightly late
    in life) that I'm a crazed sex maniac :-) !
    

    I think people do both accordiing to how the mood fits them.
    
    Many sexual dysfunction clinics have published article's on the
    use of cuddling and hugging, as a method for heightening sexual
    awareness with the idea in mind that it does not lead to the   
    actual sex act itself. 
    
    I think more credence should be given to the fact that the entire
    body is an errogenous zone.

    RE: .25
    
    	You sure you want that known to the world?? :-) :-)  
    
    	Actually Lorna, it IS possible to just cuddle/sleep together
    	all night and not have intercourse..  It's actually a welcome
    	relief nowadays... 
    
    							mike

    Perhaps I misunderstood the base note.  Or maybe we are getting
    of on a tangent.  
    
    I like apples and I like oranges.  Just because I eat an apple,
    that doesn't mean I can't eat an orange.  And eating an apple
    doesn't necessarily mean I am suddenly overwhelmed with the 
    urge to eat an orange.
    
    Emotions build slowly.  First comes affection.  Given time, and
    the right person, and the proper circumstances, the emotion we
    term "love" may follow.  So it is with my physical feelings.  
    Affection sparks a desire to touch, hug, hold, cuddle...be physi-
    cally close...eventually, given time, and the right person, and
    the proper circumstances, the desire for the "ultimate cuddle"
    follows.
    
    It seemed that our 'base noter' was bemoaning the fact that "some"
    people feel that physical affection should end with a sexual ex-
    perience.  And sometimes it's nice to just snuggle until you feel
    emotionally ready for more...
    
                              Deb
    
    Gee whiz, I hope SOMEONE agrees with me or I'm going to feel very
    antisocial!!
    
    

    In total agreement.  Now to find someone who shares that sentiment.
    That is the real problem!
    
    

    Re .27, welcome relief, huh, Mike?  Sounds like you've been busier
    lately than I have :-).
    
    Lorna
    

    RE: .30
    
    	FWIW, not really... Guys can say "No" too nowadays.. Women
    	just don't take it as gracefully though.  I guess that's
    	the price you pay for equality..
    
    	What I meant by "welcome relief" is that it's nice not to have
    	the pressure of "having" to have sex.. (Remember, many guys
    	are drilled with the words "Ya gotta git laid, ya gotta git
    	laid"..)
    
    						mike

    re .31
    
    "Women just don't take it as gracefully" ?!?!
    
    As gracefully as WHO?!?  You?  Maybe _you_ "take it gracefully",
    but I've got news for you: there are PLENTY of men out there who
    don't just take it "ungracefully" but don't take it at ALL!
    
    FWIW: I like the bulk of the note, just object to that statement.
    
    Lee

    Re .30, .31, I always figured everybody had the right to say no.
     People have the right to say no to cuddles and snuggles, too, you
    know.  I don't like to feel pressured into having to hug everybody
    and his brother either.
    
    Have you ever said no and then had the other person pick you up,
    slam you into the backseat of a car and commence to do "it" anyway??
    No, huh?  I guess you must weigh more than 95 lbs.
    
    All I'm saying is I'm a woman, and I've accepted no a heck of a
    lot more gracefully than a few of the men I've said no to.
    
    Lorna
    

    re.32
    
    YES, THIS IS MENNOTES. !++++++!
    I THINK.
    Therefore men can say what they interperet as correct.
    Women go B*LLS*IT nutso, weird, totally schizoid when you say no to
    them. 
    They have not had 1,000 years to practice the only positive hold
    they have over men (a hold they are losing every day shown very
    strongly by your comments).
    I support Mike 100 % in his understanding and statements about the
    inequality of men and women.
    
    re.33 
    Right too, Lorna.
    Which just goes to show men can be a**holes. Not all of us tho !!!!!

        <<< QUARK::DISK$QUARK2:[NOTES$LIBRARY]HUMAN_RELATIONS.NOTE;1 >>>
================================================================================
Note 427.35                     Lost in the 80's                        35 of 35
AXEL::FOLEY "Rebel without a Flu"                    23 lines  29-NOV-1987 22:01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    RE: .32
    
    	Yea, I guess I meant as gracefully as me Lee.. I take "No" as
    "No" and leave it at that.. I KNOW (all too well thank you) that
    there are guy...er..arseholes who don't take "No" for an answer...
    It's not news to me Lee. I don't like having to deal with their
    after-effects.  And I do all the time...
    
    RE: .33
    
    	Yes Lorna, I do weigh more than 95lbs. (Much more.. ugh..)
    What I'm trying to say is that if a woman makes an advance on a
    guy and the guy says "No, not tonight" or some similarly classic
    line then the women, IN MOST CASES NOT ALL, take it personally and
    get all bent out of shape.. Many guys (NOT ALL) take it "better".
    Can we say "better"??? See "after-effects" above, ok??"
    
    	Geez, I hate having to clarify these statements ALL because
    of some <explicitive deleted> out there who <explicitive deleted> 
    it up for people like me..

	Sigh...
    
    						mike

----------------------------------------------------------------------------    
	p.s. I'll now leave it to the reader to figure out what the
    	explicitives are. (And they aren't "poo-poo" and "Cuck-a" :-))

    re .34, the only "real hold" men have had over women is financial and
    they're losing that more and more everyday, too.  It will be
    interesting to see what real equality is like, although I think
    it will be our generations grandchildren who finally get that chance.
    
    Lorna
    
    

    re: .0
    
    Whatever happened to 'being in love' ? Its still here. No changes.
    Just more awareness of the alternate possibilitiess.
    
    Instead of paraphrasing someones quote that helped me bridge the
    gap from <before> to <after>; i'll say it myself:
    
    There is nothing impossible to solve, if two people really love
    one another; and are willing to work on it together. 
    
    So simple, and yet so difficult; for in loving another, we
    put our wants desires second. In giving , we get; and in losing;
    we win. If we are saddend by our loss, its something to discuss
    and talk over, and make it known. If we are joyous in our SO, then
    that too we should discuss and talk over; to reinforce to them that
    which makes us happy.
    
    Emotions are queer lot; but part of us. We don't always undersand
    the 'whys' or 'hows'; but we should know when to speak of those
    things that need to be talked about.
    
    Single, married, divorced ... no matter what our state of being...
    conversation isn't dead; unless the relationship will be !!
    
    Talking is part of the key. Desire another part. There are no rules
    except those that each agrees too, and decides to follow. How to
    know ? Talking it over, openly, even giggly at times; occasionally
    with tears, and often with laughter.
    
    Bob+3_more_hikers
    

    Lots of confusion in this interesting topic!  I got the distinct         
    impression from the base note that the man and the woman in question
    had not had sex before.  This is a very important distinction, don't 
    you think?
    
    Some replies have talked about how nice it is to be able to "just"
    cuddle.  That presumes there's plenty of "non-cuddling" going on
    in the relationship sometimes, too, yes?  Well that's not what we're 
    talking about here.  Cuddling has its merits.  No one is arguing that.
    This topic is discussing the misinterpretations of the phrase "sleeping 
    together" between two people who have never been intimate before.  The
    point of view of the base note seems to be that any misinterpretation is
    all in the woman's mind, (natch!), because we think men "have only one
    thing on their minds".  Where do I begin?
    
    If someone I had never slept with attmepted to initiated such activity, 
    using those very words, I would presume he wanted sex and I would base my 
    answer on that presumption.  Were I wrong, at worst I might feel like an 
    idiot.

    But what if I DID, (naively!), think he just wanted to "hold" me all 
    night and I was wrong?  I'd be a c*ckteaser at best, a rape statistic, 
    (or worse), at worst.  The man in question COULD easily feel justified in 
    venting his rage at me.  THEN what could I do?  I'd be considered, (by 
    the courts and by society), to be a victim of my own naivetee.  The base 
    note author sounds like he's asking women to abandon their default "pro-
    tectiveness" and adopt more trusting, (more "80's"), behaviors that will 
    land them this dangerous position sooner or later.

    I know I'm going to take the safe road every time - and base my 
    answer on the assumption that he wants sex - and risk being *just* an 
    idiot.  I'd much rather make a foolish mistake than a deadly one.

    What this sounds like to me is a man trying to make women feel guilty
    for thinking of self-preservation at such a suggestion by saying women 
    are wrongly and unfairly assuming men "have only one thing on their minds".

    But this is rather a case of a women trying to figure how to NOT risk the 
    possibility of being a tease and the unsympathetic danger that could result
    from that.  Above all, we really DON'T want to be raped and beaten and we 
    have EVERY RIGHT to dissect a new man's line so that we can guard ourselves
    against the very real potential for harm.  That you could even suggest that
    we shouldn't be this way amazes me.

    It's what's on HIS mind that holds the potential for danger and if she 
    guesses him wrong, SHE pays the price.  If I, as a woman, must pay the 
    price of my interpretation, then I demand the right to interpret the sug-
    gestion any damn way I please.  No "guilt trip" from a man is going to 
    make me ashamed and willing to waive my right to protect myself from the
    harm a man CAN do to me at his whim.  I'm not going to play russian 
    roulette with any new man's whim, I'm going to protect myself from 
    having to.

    The base note is asking women to give new men the benefit of the doubt, 
    lower their defenses and assume the best.  This is horribly bad advice and
    I don't think it's the advice that the base note author would give to his 
    sisters, daughters and/or female friends.  I am always suspicious at 
    "advice" men give that applies to potential sex partners only.  The acid 
    test of their intentions is whether or not they would want "their" women 
    to go out into the world armed with such advice.

    The base note sounds like an attempt to get women to relax during male ad-
    vances and to not always assume that what looks like an advance is indeed 
    an advance.  This bad advice clearly sets women up to potential victimiz-
    ation.

    Don't "nice" your way into danger or into doing anything you don't want to 
    do or you may innocently "nice" your way into being caught isolated, out-
    muscled and ashamed of your own naivetee because really, who'd believe you?

    Don't fall for this ladies.  When a guy asks you to sleep with him, (if 
    you've never done so before), if you assume he just wants to sleep with 
    you, sooner or later you will find yourself in a situation you can't 
    get out of and YOU WILL BE BLAMED FOR!.  

    We should not allow ourselves be bullied or jollied or insulted in any way 
    into abandoning our natural protective wariness when dealing with new men. 
    We don't always have sex on our minds but if we're contemplating being 
    alone with a man we don't know very well, we'd better have self-preserv-
    ation on our minds.  Don't let any man try to confuse the two on you and 
    manipulate you with guilt.

    Being alone with a new man CAN be dangerous.  Follow your instincts ALWAYS
    and never feel defensive or apologetic about doing so.  If he acts insulted
    or unreasonable, he's just given himself away.

    Many men are still confusing their own noble intentions with the 
    intentions of "men-at-large".  They expect the women they come in contact 
    with to automatically know the difference and to protect themselves against 
    one while not insulting or hurting the other.  Can't be done, boys.  As 
    long as there are men who rape and beat women, you are going to encounter 
    women wary of being raped and beaten.  Get used to it and don't blame us.

    
    
    I make it a rule not to be in such an intimate situation with a
    man I "don't know very well".  That is, I must know a man reasonably
    well before I am this intimate with him, whether the intimacy is
    "just cuddling" or involves sex...
    
    I HAVE had a man ask me to "just sleep" with him, a man I knew some-
    what, and wanted to know better.  He made it very clear, and I also
    made it very clear, that "just sleeping" is all we would be doing.
    We started our relationship as friends, gradually worked into the
    above situation, and eventually we were married.   For myself, going
    into a relationship veeeeery slowly is the best way....one step
    at a time!
    
    

    RE: .39
    
    Sandy, I interpreted the author of the base note to be saying that
    when he said to the woman "Let's go to bed", *she* was the one who
    was disappointed that *he* didn't mean "Let's screw". It sure sounds
    like she would have been willing to "do the dirty deed".
    
    As you can read from some of the earlier replies, some of the men
    have had similar experiences: the women expect that a man will always
    want to have sex, and if he doesn't, she thinks something is wrong
    with *him*, that he's not being "a real man".
    
    Moreover, some of the previous female respondents have written
    that if they get into bed with a man, they *want* to have sex, and
    that if they only want to snuggle, cuddle, hug, they may as well
    stay at home in their own beds, with their cats or a hot water
    bottle. 
    
    Kind of destroys your faith in stereotypes, eh? You're saying to
    women, in your reply, that if they get into bed with a man, they
    should be prepared for the worst. Trouble is, judging from the
    original note and some subsequent replies, to *some* women, the worst
    means not getting laid.
    
    And while we're on the topic of stereotyping, you state that (to
    paraphrase) so long as there are some men who beat and rape some
    women, then women must be on guard against (and not trust the
    intentions of) any men. I guess we can extrapolate that statement
    to become: 
    
       - So long as there are some blacks who beat and stab some
         whites, then whites must be on guard against (and not trust
         the intentions of) any blacks.
    
       - So long as there are some whites who beat and stab some
         blacks, then blacks must be on guard against (and not trust
         the intentions of) any whites.
    
       - So long as there are some homosexuals who try to seduce
         some heterosexuals, then heterosexuals must be on guard
         against (and not trust the intentions of) any homosexuals.
    
    Nasty business, this stereotyping. Creeps into too many areas of
    our lives, and hurts too many innocent people.
    
      Alan                                           

    RE: .39
    
    	What's the matter with asking like .40 did Sandy? Is that SO
    	hard? Now don't get me wrong Sandy, I hate these clowns too
    	as I've said but to constantly raise the "Look out girls! Here
    	comes another one of those "men"!" isn't doing anything good
    	for either sex.  Now saying "Girls, don't go to bed with him
    	until you have REALLY good communications and a certain level
    	of trust" is much more constructive.  Hey, I don't like this
    	either. Rape abhors me and makes me sick to my stomach. Like
    	I've said, I get to deal with the after-effects (on friends
    	and former SO's). It's no party but there ARE better people
    	out there..  I don't claim to have the answer for a women who
    	has been brutalized in the past. She's living with a fear
    	that, God willing, she will be able to deal with. I can't imagine
    	what it's like nor do I claim too. All I can say is that there
    	ARE men out there who DO accept "No" for an answer and who only
    	DO want to spend time with someone in thier arms. Unfortunately
    	for the human race, these people aren't everywhere.. That's
    	why it takes good communication and built-up trust to get
    	to a point of "just sleeping together". 
    
    RE: .40
    	
    	Well said.. Nice to hear you two have good communication. (Why get
    	to the point of considering sleeping with someone without 
    	the communication??)
    
    RE: .41 
    
    	Well said.. I'm tired of stereotypes... (ie: all men are pigs..)


    	Bottom line to all of this?  Women are now experiencing the
    	feeling many men have been literally brought up with. Some 
    	women are having to accept "no" for an answer. Some men are
    	learning to say "no".  We are growing more equal but there is
    	a long road to follow.  It's a difficult time for the "Men of
    	the '80's" and the "Women of the '80's". We're getting to see
    	what each other have been "hiding" all these years "behind the
    	fence".
    
    							mike
        
    							mike

    Am I reading this right?  Are you telling me that two people of
    opsite sex who aren't related can go to bed together and not, at
    some level, think about sex beyond cuddling?  I don't believe it.

    
    
    Silly!  No one said I didn't "think" about it!  (I suspect that
    he did too).....just that some things are better when not rushed!
    
                     Deb
    
    Maybe restraint comes with maturity and confidence?
    
    

    
    
    
    UH-OH!  Before anyone yells at me, I forgot to put the ;-)
    after my p.s. in -1!!
    
                           dk
    

    
    
    	Think? Hell yes! I'm human.. Doesn't mean I'm gonna "do it"..
    
    							mike

    I too would be content to just hold and be held all night, without
    expecting anything more.  Physical closeness itself is very important
    to me in a relationship.
    				Steve

RE: .39

If someone told me they wanted to 'sleep', and I assumed "sex", and I was wrong,
I would not feel like an "idiot", but I wouldn't get bent out of shape either...

"That presumes there's plenty of "non-cuddling" going on in the relationship
sometimes, too, yes?  Well that's not what we're talking about here."

What???

"The point of view of the base note seems to be that any misinterpretation is
all in the woman's mind, (natch!), because we think men "have only one thing on
their minds"."

I think you are exagerating a bit, but I won't speak for .0 other then to repeat
the first paragraph of my reply.

"But what if I DID, (naively!), think he just wanted to "hold" me all night and
I was wrong?  I'd be a c*ckteaser at best, a rape statistic, (or worse), at
worst." 

True, and I think that you might be better off not "sleeping" with someone
unless you are prepared to accept the possibility that they might want more.
That holds regardless of sex, or whether you would say "yes", or "no".

Consider, however ...  Might there be less rape if there were *more* cuddling in
our society?  I think that there would be. 

"What this sounds like to me is a man trying to make women feel guilty for
thinking of self-preservation at such a suggestion by saying women are wrongly
and unfairly assuming men "have only one thing on their minds"."

I hear .0 complaining about women being bent out of shape when they find out
that he only wants to "sleep", not that he is trying to make them feel guilty
for being (over) cautious. 

"Above all, we really DON'T want to be raped and beaten and we have EVERY RIGHT
to dissect a new man's line so that we can guard ourselves against the very real
potential for harm."

Sure, you have that right, but don't bitch when it turns out that the face value
is the true value.

"If I, as a woman, must pay the price of my interpretation, then I demand the
right to interpret the suggestion any damn way I please."

Hmmm... consider those words coming from the mouth of a frustrated would be
rapist...  

No, I don't think that you have the right to interpret anything anybody says any
way that you please!

How does your words in this topic jive with your words in another topic?

"What we choose to be, lonely or happy, is the result NOT of external events but
of how we perceive and interpret those external events.  Were that not the case,
we'd be helpless emotional basket-cases buffeted about by every innocuous daily
event."  [Sandy, 432.10] 

"The base note is asking women to give new men the benefit of the doubt, lower
their defenses and assume the best."

I don't think so...

"Don't "nice" your way into danger or into doing anything you don't want to do
or you may innocently "nice" your way into being caught isolated, out- muscled
and ashamed of your own naivetee because really, who'd believe you?"

Good advice...

"We don't always have sex on our minds but if we're contemplating being alone
with a man we don't know very well, we'd better have self preservation on our
minds." 

Now *that* sounds paranoid!  Sounds like you're better of by yourself.  If you
are paranoid, you are better off by yourself.

"If he acts insulted or unreasonable, he's just given himself away."

And what if the woman acts insulted???

"Get used to it and don't blame us."

I don't blame women for being cautious.  I blame women for getting upset when
they find out that what I said was what I meant.

Jim.

	Hi Brian!

	   I guess I could be considered one of the women who "takes
	it personally," so maybe it will help if I explain my feelings
	about the subject.  (Note, this is only my point of view... I
	have no idea if other women feel the same way.)

	   I am, and always have been, very insecure about my physical
	self.  Therefore, when I go to bed with a man, I give him a sort
	of power over me... power to approve or disapprove of the way
	I look.  And his approval or lack of it influences my feelings
	about myself.  (I know it shouldn't, and I'm working on that, 
	but it still happens, though to a lesser degree than it used to.)  

	   The easiest way for me to tell that he is not repulsed by
	my body is if he wants to make love to me.  This is not the 
	only way, of course, but the simplest.  He can also give me his
	"approval" by caressing me, by telling me I'm pretty, or even just
	by looking at me (among other things).  And when I get this positive
	reinforcement, I feel wonderful.

	   But if I don't get reinforcement--if I go to bed with someone who
	all of a sudden says "Oh, I just wanted to SLEEP with you," I 
	begin to wonder what is wrong with me.  I wonder what about me
	repluses him so.  Does he think I'm gross because I have razor stubble 
	on my legs?  Because one breast is slightly larger than the other?
	Because I have a pimple on my back?   Does he think I'm ugly?  This,
	of course, puts me in a rather foul mood.  

	   Again, this is just my point of view.  I imagine there are women--
	and men--who feel the same, but I don't know.  Anyway, I hope it
	helps.

	Take care,
	Tara

	  What an incredible amount of tension in this note and its
     replies!  I think the topic has really struck some nerves.

	  Yes, you can cuddle without having sex.  You can even cuddle
     without thinking about having sex.  The times this latter has happened
     to me, the issue of sex has been dealt with before the cuddling.  It
     has been by having sex elsewhere in the relationship;  it has other
     times been by the parties realizing that having sex is inappropriate
     to the relationship.  I am sure there are almost certainly other
     mechanisms that I happen not to have encountered.

	  There is nothing wrong with wanting to have sex while you're
     cuddling.  There is also nothing wrong with _not_ wanting to have sex
     while you're cuddling.  It is hard for cuddling to be other than
     comfortable, friendly, and sensual;  having sex can be these, but
     seems to be too often a performance or a dominance contest.  I would
     entertain the suggestion that cuddling is more intimate than sex,
     because it happens in far more restricted circumstances.  The idea of
     forcible sex may be abhorrent, but the idea of a forcible cuddle is
     absurd.

				  Brian Hetrick
	      [I guess we'd better call me "Brian-2" in this note]

    
    RE .49....Thanks, Tara, for sharing your feelings with us.  You'll
    get no ridicule from me.
    
    RE .1 to .50
    
    	Thanks to everyone.  The array of responses and opinions is
    tremendous and encouraging.  When I origianally put in .0 I had
    no idea it could be taken in so many different ways.  Now that I
    read the interpretations I go back and I say, "Hey, it sounds like
    I could've meant that".
    
    	But no matter how it's been interpreted the subject has been
    in the same catagory, taking in to different tangents, and making
    it that much more enjoyable.
    
    	First of all let me say that, when it comes to sex, I never
    have it unless there is an emotional bond.  This is not to say that
    I fall in love with everyone I have sex with and it's not to say
    that having sex without love makes you an *Oh So* evil being.  I've
    always been been an "live and let live" kinda guy.  Do whatever
    makes you happy as long as it doesn't interfere of damage anyone
    else's life or happiness.
    
    	I do believe, though, that, in the case of sexual denial/rejection,
    men/boys/males/guys/as*h*les/whatever-you-want-to-call-us tend to
    be rejected(I'm talking sexual situations here) and therefore take
    it better than most(*MOST*) girls(that's what I call'm) do.
    
    	I had no idea that by myself could I try to make all of womankind
    less aware of any "hidden" dangers, thus causing rapes, beatings,
    or even sexual frustration.  I don't take the subjects lightly but
    I do tend to be disturbed by fanatics who blatently throw about absurd 
    accusations.  
    
    	"Take a point of view and magnify any piece.  Although you see
    it better it only becomes out of proportion with the whole."
    
    						Me
    
    	Right or Wrong can't really be used here...only different. 
    There is a time and occasion for just about any opinion.
    
    					Brian

    
    
    So, tell me, Brian, are you still lost in the '80's?  
    
    If nothing else, the diversity of replies has shown you
    the importance of clear, honest communication.  
    
    I think Tara made an excellent point.  (Some) Women want
    to know that they are physically attractive to men.  But
    we (some) also want to know that men respect our intellect
    and emotions too.  Boy, that's a real fine line to walk,
    isn't it?  By the same token we (some) want to let the man
    know that he is physically attractive-otherwise, how will
    he know to make a gesture?-but that we (some) don't take
    sex lightly....
    
    Gee, I'm sure glad I'm married and don't have to worry about
    all of this!!
    
    Good luck in your quest for love and the ultimate cuddle, Brian!
    
                               Deborah
    
    P.S.  minor nit:  PLEASE DON'T REFER TO WOMEN AS GIRLS!  
    
    

    Very sensitive nerves touched here.
    
    And the result seems to be a lot of resentment, mistrust, fear and
    anger.  It would hardly be apparent if not for the title of the
    base note that this was about love and closeness.
    
    It does appear also, that it is much harder to say "yes" than "no,"
    and important to justify why.
    
    So we continue to go on, for the most part, a frustrated society,
    afraid of eachother but needing eachother, trying to find ourselves
    not realizing we can find ourselves best in others, looking for
    something and yet placing restrictions on having it...
    
    ...and we have probably over intellectualized something that can't
    be defined.
    
    I would never say no to being touch and held.  It is what makes
    life worth living, whether from my boy or a woman, I am reassured
    that someone cares, that there is gentleness amid coarseness and
    cruelty, that we are all in this together!
    
    GRG
    
    
    (P.S. -.1  Marriage has never guarranteed that two people are immune!)

    	I used to have similar tendencies as Tara (-.?) has regarding
    	gaining physical approval from men.  I also have just *slept* 
    	with someone (a very nice memory) and I have also gotten into 
    	bed with someone only to find out he didn't want to have sex 
    	(just everything *but*!).  I was young, and it was quite a 
    	shock because I didn't realize that men (especially 21 year
    	olds) said no!

    	To me, cuddling means feeling comfortable with someone.  I
    	believe it's possible to "just cuddle" with a friend who is
    	turning into a potential lover -- in other words, someone
    	you've known a while and feel relatively comfortable with.
    	But I cannot imagine meeting someone for the first time (at
    	a party, whatever) and feeling comfortable enough with him 
    	to share the intimacy of cuddling.  I can, on the other hand, 
    	imagine having sex, because as most of us know sex does not 
    	necessarily mean intimacy.
        
    	Just because there are different interpretations of the base
    	note (and different experiences/feelings to share) does not 
    	mean condemnations are in order.  -.1 was right that it IS a
    	touchy subject (no pun intended) and some of us have both
    	tender and painful memories.  So please, let's not attack.
    	I know that I'm just trying to understand both male and 
    	female points of view on this. 
    

    One thing that has long amused me about this note is that there
    have been no answers (as I recall - or perhaps only a few) from
    people in long term relationships. I think that one of the most
    wonderful and important things about such a relationship is just
    how important cuddling is...when you are too tired or too stressed
    or too whatever, you can *always* cuddle.
    
    Bonnie
    who_has_to_sleep_with_pillows_when_her_husband_goes_on_trips

    re: .55
    
�    One thing that has long amused me about this note is that there
�    have been no answers (as I recall - or perhaps only a few) from
�    people in long term relationships. I think that one of the most
�    wonderful and important things about such a relationship is just
�    how important cuddling is...when you are too tired or too stressed
�    or too whatever, you can *always* cuddle.
    
    One of my more amused observations on life is that when I was younger,
    a mature relationship was one in which we'd sleep together and make
    love... Now that I'm older, a mature relationship is one where we
    sleep together and lots of times we only sleep...
    
    
    					--D
    

    re: .55
    
    Bonnie,
    
    You're right.  I haven't seen too many replies in this note from
    those who appear to be a in long term relationship.  In fact, I 
    recall one reply mentioned not having to worry about this problem
    because the author was married.  Well, so am I and it IS something
    I think about.
    
    I'm a natural born cuddler, but my husband doesn't like to waste
    time "cuddling".   Although, we've always managed a to find and
    maintain a fairly good balance, I'll opt for more "cuddle" time
    any day.
    
    Beckie
   

    
    
    Oh, dear, what I said was not what I meant! ;-)   I guess
    I qualify as being in a 'long term' relationship...if 2
    years is considered long term (I think by today's stan-
    dards we're practically celebrating our silver anniversary,
    but that's another topic, isn't it?)....and when I commented
    that I'm glad I'm married and don't have to worry about all
    this, I meant-getting to know a new person, learning to com-
    municate, what they say and what it really means....thank-
    fully, that's all behind us now!  Fortunately, we are BOTH
    cuddlers of the first degree...I don't think I could be with
    a man who didn't like to snuggle-long and often.  Course, it
    makes it real hard to get up in the morning, especially now
    that the nights are getting nippy.....
    
    Now that I think of it-I've hear a number of women mention 
    that the current love_of_their_life was not physically af-
    fectionate (listen up, guys!!)....that they wished there was
    more touching and holding in the relationship.  I honestly
    don't recall ever having that problem.  Maybe I've just auto-
    matically rejected potential relationships with men who did
    not reciprocate.
    
    Yet on the other hand...I'm a very physical person, and often
    touch or hug my friends (male and female) and the guys especially
    seem to really enjoy the affection.
    
    Gee, I'm confused.  My perception of reality seems to be quite
    different from the reality of the "rest of the world"....
    
                    DK
    
    

    I certainly agree with everyone who says that cuddling is nice in
    a long-term relationship.  But, that cuddling is not just cuddling
    for the sake of a warm body to hug so you're not alone, it's expressing
    and receiving affection from somebody you love.  I can't feel that
    way about just anybody.

    The way I interpreted the base note was that this person was talking
    about meeting somebody new whom you have never slept with, and never
    had sex with, and that person asks you to sleep with them and it
    means they want to cuddle and they don't want to have sex.  That's
    entirely different to me than wanting a lot of physical affection,
    besides sex, in a long term relationship.  (But, I have to get to
    know somebody, and like somebody a bit before I feel like cuddling.)
    
    Also, it's never happened to me.  I have never once spent a night
    with a man for the first time and just cuddled.  Maybe it's some
    new phenomenon that has happened with younger people and with older
    people who have been single for a long time and are sick of casual
    sex and/or afraid of getting Aids.
    
    Lorna
    

    re:	The person looking for those of us in long-term relationships:
    
    	I'm in a long-term relationship also, so you know there
    	are people like us out here.  Rare in today's society!!!
    

    If 23 years counts as a long-term relationship, count me in.
    How ever said it was going to be easy?

    re: .55
    
    I think a lot of people (who replied ?) who contributed felt they
    were in a long-term-relationship. Its just that they (we ?) are
    still near the beginning of it, rather than near the end (middle?)
    of it.
    
    
    re: .43

    >Am I reading this right?  Are you telling me that two people of
    >opsite sex who aren't related can go to bed together and not, at
    >some level, think about sex beyond cuddling?  I don't believe it.

    I think you are reading it right ! There are some people who go
    to bed with other people and REALLY only want to cuddle and keep
    warm ! (Some of them are now divorced, too !).
    
    I agree, there is a time for everything, depending on its 'season'.    
    
    One could easliy paraphrase the popular song from 'seasons' to
    'feelings'; feeelings of cuddling, exhaustion, sexy, mentoring,
    and whatever else 'people' have in common (or want to have.) ;^)
    
    1=Bob+1+2  :^)

     Re: .55

	  I looked up the various authors of .1 to .54 in the conference
     registry (note 3.*), to determine what percentage were married or
     otherwise in "long term relationships."

	  Of the six contributors who described themself in 3.*, two
     describe themselves as married, two describe themselves as divorced,
     one describes himself as single, and one gives no marital status.  The
     remaining 20 authors of replies .1 through .54 have no response in the
     conference registry.

	  Adding up the years of marriage, where determinable by the
     self-descriptions in 3.*, there is a minimum of 55 person-years of
     marriage experience represented in the replies to this note.  The
     durations of the marriages range from nine to 24 years.

	  I conclude that there is more experience with long-term
     relationships represented in this set of replies than is apparent from
     a cursory inspection.

          Examining the contents of the various replies makes it apparent
     that contributors who are not and have not been married appear to be
     substantially under-represented in the conference registry.  I find
     this interesting in the extreme, but will refrain from speculating as
     to implications.

				  Brian Hetrick

    re .51
    
�    less aware of any "hidden" dangers, thus causing rapes, beatings,
�    or even sexual frustration.  I don't take the subjects lightly but
�    I do tend to be disturbed by fanatics who blatently throw about absurd 
�    accusations.  
    
    The words "fanatics" and "absurd" are inappropriate when talking
    about the subjects you name.  It is not "absurd" to be worried about
    the idea that this might happen, and it does not take a "fanatic"
    to bring the subject up.
    
    A substantial number of the women who have replied to this note
    HAVE been raped.  Yet more have had at least one "close-call". 
    These things happen, a lot more than you would believe.
    
    I have been asked to "just sleep" with more than one person (very
    good friends) and found out a little late that "just sleep" was
    the last thing in their minds, even after explaining that I had
    recently gone through the trauma of being raped and REALLY did NOT
    want to have sex.
    
    The caution required is unfortunate, but it is certainly less bad
    than the possible alternative
    
    As far as women "taking it badly" when you make it very clear that
    you DON'T want to, I can see that this does happen sometimes (maybe
    even "*most*" of the times, as you say).  I just want(ed) to remind
    you that all things are relative: a woman might b*tch and moan,
    but she won't FORCE you.  A man might b*tch and moan, but there
    is always the possibility that he WILL FORCE you, even if he seems
    (or rather seemED) to be a nice guy.
    
    It is good to recognize that men too are subject to verbal pressures.
    Those pressures can turn into a kind of rape, I think.  But if a
    man objects (by running, or using violence) to a woman's verbal
    pressures, he is not in danger of being forced.
    
    Yes, I probably sound like a "fanatic", overly obsessed with one
    possibility, but I feel very strongly that the media (or whoever)
    has done a good job minimizing the numbers: put 10 women in a room,
    and anywhere from 2 to 6 (depending on whose reports you read) have
    been through an experience which gives them VERY good reason to
    be wary.
    
    Lee

     Re: .65

     >	  The words "fanatics" and "absurd" are inappropriate when talking
     >	  about the subjects you name.  It is not "absurd" to be worried
     >	  about the idea that this might happen, and it does not take a
     >	  "fanatic" to bring the subject up.

	  I had interpreted the subject section of .51 as referring to .39,
     which states, in part:

     >	  The base note is asking women to give new men the benefit of the
     >	  doubt, lower their defenses and assume the best.  This is
     >	  horribly bad advice and I don't think it's the advice that the
     >	  base note author would give to his sisters, daughters and/or
     >	  female friends.  I am always suspicious at "advice" men give that
     >	  applies to potential sex partners only.  The acid test of their
     >	  intentions is whether or not they would want "their" women to go
     >	  out into the world armed with such advice.
     >
     >	  The base note sounds like an attempt to get women to relax during
     >	  male advances and to not always assume that what looks like an
     >	  advance is indeed an advance.  This bad advice clearly sets women
     >	  up to potential victimization.

	  Were these statements about the base note's contents accurate, I
     would share these opinions.  But the base note most emphatically does
     _not_ ask women to "lower their defenses and assume the best."  Nor
     does it set "women up to potential victimization."  While I would not
     characterize .39 as "fanatic" and "absurd," I would characterize the
     vehemence in it as misdirected.

	  It is neither fanatic nor absurd to be worried about the
     potential for rape.  But it _is_ absurd to claim that the base note
     promotes rape or conditions conducive to rape.  Go read it.  Point to
     any exhortation _at all_, much less an exhortation to women to lower
     their defenses.  Point to _any_ statement which is normative rather
     than descriptive.

	  Reply .51 does not say that it is "fanatic" and "absurd" to be
     concerned with the possiblity of rape.  It says that the accusation
     that .0 promotes rape or conditions conducive to rape is "fanatic" and
     "absurd."

	  I may believe that killing baby seals is terrible.  Were I to
     condemn .0 for promoting killing baby seals, that condemnation could
     rightly be described as "fanatic" and "absurd" even by someone who
     shared the posited belief about baby seals.

	  So let's back off a little, shall we?  Nobody here has yet said
     rape is a good thing, or a thing not to be worried about.

				  Brian Hetrick

    I wish the bickering would stop!
    
    Maybe there should be a summit on disarming our fears.  This all
    sounds like the nuclear paranoia we have been living with.  Men
    and women live with distrust of eachother for the most part, and
    who have successful relationships seem to be able to work through
    all the fears and mistrust and establish a common goal.  It used
    to be love (which I though was mentioned in the base note) but now
    seems to be other things.
    
    This note has a feeling of a lot of people in a room with a handful
    of darts with no dartboard.

     Hi Brian,
    
      It's me Skip ... I know what you mean.. you know it
    You've seen or heard I'm sure... Look from what I can
    see folks morels today are shot, Fast life, things as
    such affect us all in different ways is my guess, some 
    guys/gals as us still have what it takes, others just 
    don't care. People look at each other only for short
    periods, unless its there ( the feeling ) and then will
    take the time to see the person in company. I don't know,
    I'm helplessly lost myself.....

        I'm nearly 400 notes behind in H-R what with vacations, DECUS,
        customer visits, holidays and all. I don't have a lot to add to
        this topic, but one comment did inspire me to write. in 427.60
        Lorna St. Hilaire said,
        
            I have never once spent a night with a man for the first
            time and just cuddled.  Maybe it's some new phenomenon...
        
        Well, it doesn't seem that new a phonemenon to me. Most of the
        first nights I've ever spent with a woman did not result in
        having sex. The cause wasn't either being "sick of casual sex
        and/or afraid of getting Aids". Certainly not the later as I
        haven't been involved with anyone but my wife since well before
        I'd ever heard of Aids. As to being sick of casual sex, I never
        was interested in casual sex so I couldn't really get sick of
        it. 
        
        In general, the reason for not having sex with the girls and
        women that I spent the night in bed with was that that wasn't
        what I was looking for and it wasn't where our relationship was
        at the time. 
        
        As may have come out in my various notes, I'm reallya rather
        conservative and old-fashioned sort of person. Sex outside of a
        relationship that is either permanent or at least has the
        possibility of permanence doesn't really interest me. Really
        good sex, so far as I'm concerned, is an expression of deep love
        and commitment. Without that it seems pretty empty to me. 
        
        In many ways I feel the similarly about cuddling and snuggling,
        except that the level of commitment is a lot lower. Cuddling and
        intimacy are a great way to express affection and caring. The
        number of women that I've wanted to sahre that with has been a
        good deal greater than the number with whom I've desired to
        share sex. I've acted on only a fraction of both, but the result
        is that I've spent the night with a number of women that I
        didn't make love to (or "made love to" a number that I didn't
        "have sex with" if you want to take "make love to" in a more old
        fashioned way).
        
        Like another noter, my relationship with my wife started out as
        a "spend the night together without sex", and evolved into the
        "spend our life together with and without sex" thing. It seems
        to me, in fact, that that's probably the best basis to build a
        permanenet relationship on. 
        
        By the way neither the group of women with whom I've "just spent
        the night" nor those with whom I've shared more is very big. As
        I said, I'm an old-fashioned fuddy-duddy at heart. 
        
        JimB.